001-2024-0328_DLMBLSE01-02_Course_Book (3)

[Audio] 1. ORGANIZATIONAL behavior AS The foundation OF leadership Case Study Synergy Manufacturing is a mid sized company specializing in the production of industrial conveyer belts. In recent years, the company has been facing challenges related to performance of its employees and some of its employees have also quit to join other companies. The management has observed a decline in productivity, including delayed production and decreased product quality. There is a noticeable lack of commitment among employees. Many have expressed a lack of enthusiasm for their work, and there is an increasing turnover rate. The company recognized that job performance and commitment are closely interrelated. Employees who are committed to their work tend to perform better, and higher job performance can contribute to increased commitment. To address these challenges, Synergy Manufacturing tried to identify the factors affecting job performance and commitment. To achieve that the company conducted surveys and held focus group discussions with employees. This helped them identify several key issues, including lack of clear job expectations and roles, insufficient training and skill development opportunities, limited recognition and rewards for excellent performance, and a disconnect between employees' values and the company's mission. To boost motivation and job performance, the company introduced an employee recognition and rewards program. Employees who consistently demonstrated outstanding performance were rewarded with bonuses, public recognition, and opportunities for career advancement. This recognition system encouraged employees to excel in their roles. They also clarified job expectations by defining roles and responsibilities more explicitly. They took steps to ensure that the company's mission and values aligned with the personal values of its employees. This alignment created a sense of purpose and commitment among the workforce. In a year, Synergy Manufacturing experienced significant improvements. Employee job performance levels improved. The quality of the products increased, and production timelines were consistently met. Employees became more committed to their work, with higher levels of enthusiasm and dedication to their roles. The company experienced a decrease in employee turnover, as employees felt more satisfied and engaged in their positions. Synergy Manufacturing thus successfully tackled its challenges related to job performance and commitment by identifying the factors affecting these areas and implementing strategies to address them. 12.

[Audio] 1.1 What is Organizational Behavior? As we entered the 21st century, significant transformations unfolded in the workplace, profoundly impacting the individuals employed therein. These changes encompass shifts in how, when, where, and with whom people work. Whether they are megatrends like globalization, digitalization, diversity in workforce, or temporary events like the COVID-19 pandemic; the impact on work and work behavior is readily discernable. Consequently, the characteristics of the workforce have evolved, including leadership demands and styles, working patterns, and alterations in how individuals commence their careers and when employees opt to conclude their working years. Other monumental shifts involve the integration of advanced information technologies into the very fabric of our organizations and lives, as well as the increasing importance of intangible knowledge (growth of knowledge economy) as the primary asset in the realm of work, superseding tangible units of production (for example, Hadad, 2017; Karlsson and others, 2010). These transformations have manifested in public and private sector organizations, spanning both unionized and nonunionized sectors, nonprofit enterprises, and family businesses (for example, Rösler and others, 2021; Jurisch and others, 2013). Knowledge economy places a strong emphasis on intellectual capabilities, information technology, and human capital, and it relies on the creation, application, and dissemination of knowledge as key assets. Furthermore, structural modifications, due to the changes in work patterns and requirements, have also significantly affected individuals within organizations. This includes the drive towards achieving greater efficiency and competitiveness, often leading to downsizing and restructuring in previously large organizations. Simultaneously, there is a trend towards expanding into global giants through mergers and acquisitions of other entities. These sweeping changes in the nature of work pose fresh and substantial challenges to work performance. Consequently, it prompts us to engage in understanding work and the people engaged in it. questioning whether the understandings developed over the past century still remains relevant to the contemporary workplace and the current workforce (Barling & Cooper, 2008). This juncture presents an opportunity to delve into the study of organizational behavior. Organizational Behavior – Definition Organizational behavior, often abbreviated as OB, is a specialized field of study that examines the influence of individuals, groups, and the organizational structure on how people behave within a company. The ultimate aim of is to apply this knowledge to enhance the effectiveness of an organization. To simplify, OB is the study of people's actions in a workplace and how those actions impact the organization's performance. Given its focus on work related situations, OB places significant emphasis on aspects like job related concerns, work, absenteeism, employee turnover, productivity, human performance, and management. While there is ongoing discussion about the importance of each, OB encompasses fundamental areas of interest such as motivation, leadership behavior and authority, interpersonal communication, group dynamics and processes, attitude development and perception, change management, conflict resolution and negotiation, and work design. 13.

[Audio] The Interdisciplinary Nature of OB Organizational behavior is an applied field of behavioral science that draws insights from various behavioral disciplines. Robbins and others (2017) contend that the primary fields of influence include (i) psychology, (ii) social psychology, (iii) sociology, and (iv) anthropology. Needs satisfaction (or frustration) strongly influences human motivai) Psychology predominantly contributes to our understanding at the individual or micro level of analysis. Psychologists are concerned with studying and comprehending individual behavior. Contributions of psychology to the field of OB encompasses learning theories, personality theories, counselling, and industrial and organizational psychology. While early industrial/organizational psychologists concentrated on issues like fatigue, boredom, and other factors affecting working conditions that could hinder efficient work performance, more recently, their contributions have expanded to the areas of cognition, emotions, individual differences, training, leadership effectiveness, needs satisfaction and motivation at workplace, job satisfaction, decision making processes, performance evaluation, attitude assessment, employee selection methods, work design, job related stress, and work life balance. tion. In organizational behavior, needs range from autonomy in decision making to competence. ii) Social psychology integrates concepts from both psychology and sociology, even though it is generally categorized as a branch of psychology. It centers on how individuals influence one another. Social psychologists have extensively studied the implementation of change and the reduction of barriers to its acceptance. They also make substantial contributions to the understanding and alteration of attitudes, communication patterns, building trust, and investigating group behavior, power dynamics, and conflict. iii) Sociology explores people in relation to their social environment or culture. Sociologists have enriched OB by studying group behavior in organizations, particularly within formal and complex organizations. Most notably, sociology has contributed to research on organizational culture, formal organization theory and structure, organizational technology, communication, power dynamics, and conflict. iv) Anthropology involves the study of societies to gain insights into human beings and their activities. Anthropologists' work on cultures and environments has facilitated our understanding of disparities in fundamental values, attitudes, and behavior among people from different countries and within different organizations. Much of our current comprehension of organizational culture, organizational environments, and distinctions between national cultures results from the contributions of anthropologists or those who employ their research methods. Leadership in Organizational Behavior Studies The cornerstone principles of a thriving and steady organization encompass credible leadership and efficient management. In challenging times, the presence of reliable leaders who can inspire the workforce to give their utmost effort and guide their organization through difficulties, becomes even more critical. Leaders establish the organizational culture and ensure smooth operations, as they are the ones responsible for defining an 14.

[Audio] organization's distinct characteristics and unifying all its components. Their leadership actions have a profound impact on the organization's culture and the path it takes within society. Organizational culture is the collective belief and shared expectations among the members of an organization. It encompasses the norms, values, structure, mission, and leadership assumptions held by individuals within that organization. Thus, leadership plays a pivotal role in the realm of business dynamics and the work environment, and the skills required for effective leadership and influence are indispensable. However, it is worth noting that leadership, as a vital element in any organization, can significantly contribute to business failures (Gavkhar, 2022). That is precisely the reason why leadership remains a subject of ongoing interest for researchers in organizational behavior. 1.2 Job Performance Individual performance serves as the fundamental foundation upon which the entire economy relies (Kim & Ployhart, 2014). Devoid of individual performance, there would be no team achievements, no unit accomplishments, no organizational success, and ultimately, no performance within economic sectors (Campbell & Wiernik, 2015). Job performance is the collective measure of employee behaviors that bring about some expected value for organizations, which can be positive or negative (Chernyshenko & Stark, 2005). Motowidlo (2003) defines job performance as an aggregate of distinct behavioral actions an individual executes within a designated time frame, with an expected value to the organization. When describing job performance in the context of organizational behavior, one can argue if performance and behavior are identical constructs. Though used interchangeably, Motowildo and Kell (2013) clarify that behavior, performance, and outcomes (results) should not be conflated. Behavior constitutes the actions individuals take. Performance signifies the anticipated value, in organizational terms, of these actions. Outcomes, on the other hand, represent the conditions or states of individuals or entities that are modified by these actions, either aiding or impeding organizational effectiveness. Consequently, outcomes serve as the pathway through which an individual's behavior either facilitates or obstructs an organization in accomplishing its goals, underscoring the importance of focusing on outcomes when assessing individual job performance. Factors of Job Performance Job performance is influenced by numerous factors that play a vital role for both employees and organizations. These are some of the key factors that can contribute to job performance: Individual level factors Skills and competencies: The knowledge, skills, and competencies that employees bring to their roles significantly influence their performance (Motowildo, 2003). This encompasses technical skills, problem solving abilities, and interpersonal skills. 15.

[Audio] Motivation: Employee motivation is a significant driver of better performance. It can stem from intrinsic sources, such as personal drive, or extrinsic factors like rewards and recognition (for example, Riyanto, and others, 2021). Work attitude and job satisfaction: Attitudes like organizational commitment and job satisfaction strongly correlate with high performance. Satisfied and committed employees tend to perform well, and job satisfaction can both result from and contribute to good performance. Job fit: Ensuring alignment between an employee's skills, interests, and values with their job role is essential for enhancing job performance. Figure 1: Factors of Job Performance Source: Tusharika Mukherjee (2023). Job relevant factors Leadership: Effective leadership and management practices create a supportive environment for employees to excel. Supportive managers can motivate and guide their teams. Work environment: The physical and psychological work environment, including tools, resources, and safety measures, significantly affects performance. Organizational culture: A positive and inclusive workplace culture (for example, Shore and others, 2018) fosters high performance by encouraging collaboration, innovation, and a sense of belonging (e.g, Awadh & Saad, 2013). Factors like perceived equity (in rewards and recognition), organizational justice (for example, Shan and others, 2015), organizational support (for example, Chen and others, 2020) influence job performance in varied ways. In addition, organizations that invest in employee training and development programs often experience improved job performance. Continuous learning (often an integral part of learning organizations) enhances skills and knowledge that facilitates job performance (for example, Sessa & London, 2015). Effective collaboration, communication, and teamwork within team based work environments positively impact individual job performance. Organizations that pro16.

[Audio] mote maintaining a healthy work life balance are more likely to facilitate effective job performance, enhanced productivity, and a reduced risk of burnout. Similarly, encouraging innovation and creative thinking can lead to improved performance, particularly in roles that require problem solving and new ideas. It's important to acknowledge that these factors are interconnected and can vary based on the specific job, industry, and individual characteristics. Employees and organizations often target these factors to improve job performance and overall productivity. The Multidimensionality of Job Performance Behaviors related to job performance are typically categorized into three main classes (Barling & Cooper, 2008; Chernyshenko & Stark, 2005): 1. Task performance 2. Contextual performance 3. Adaptive performance (counterproductivity) Task performance Task performance encompasses an individual's contributions to organizational success. It pertains to actions that are officially recognized within the reward system and align with the job descriptions (Barling & Cooper, 2008). Chernyshenko and Stark (2005) define task performance as actions that either (1) directly convert raw materials into products and services or (2) support and maintain the successful transformation of these raw materials. These behaviors are explicitly outlined in an employee's job description and are considered role prescribed. In a broader context, task performance involves activities that either convert materials into the goods and services produced by the organization or facilitate its efficient operation (Motowidlo and others, 1997). Essentially, task performance represents the fulfillment of the contractual obligations between the employer and employee. Furthermore, task performance is a multi faceted concept. Campbell (1990) introduced a hierarchical model featuring eight performance factors, with five of them related to task performance: 1. Job specific task proficiency 2. Non job specific task proficiency 3. Proficiency in written and oral communication 4. Supervision (relevant for leadership positions) 5. To some extent, management, and administration Each of these five factors can be further broken down into sub factors, which may vary in importance depending on the specific job requirements. For instance, the supervision factor includes aspects such as guiding, directing, motivating subordinates, providing feedback, maintaining positive working relationships, and coordinating subordinates and resources to achieve task completion (Borman & Brush, 1993). 17.

[Audio] Contextual performance Organizational Merely meeting the formal job requirements is insufficient, as there is often a need to surpass these expectations (Sonnentag & Frese, 2002). Contextual performance encompasses behaviors that don't directly contribute to organizational output but instead foster a supportive organizational, social, and psychological environment. These are discretionary behaviors that aren't explicitly prescribed by the job role but contribute to shaping the organizational, social, and psychological context of the workplace. Examples of contextual performance include volunteering for tasks that aren't part of the formal job description, assisting and collaborating with colleagues, and adhering to organizational rules and procedures. In the business realm, these behaviors are often referred to as organizational citizenship behaviors (O-C-B--) (Chernyshenko & Stark, 2005). citizenship behaviors refer to the comprehensive term used to depict the positive and beneficial actions and behaviors Notably, contextual performance differs from task performance, as it involves actions that aren't officially outlined in the job description. Nevertheless, it indirectly bolsters organizational performance by facilitating task performance. exhibited by employees that go beyond the Borman and Motowidlo (1993) categorize contextual performance into five groups: requirements of their official job duties. It encompasses all voluntary 1. Volunteering for activities that go beyond one’s formal job requirements efforts made by employees to aid their colleagues and contribute to the 2. Demonstrating unwavering enthusiasm and commitment when essential for fulfilling crucial task requirements overall well being of the 3. Providing assistance and support to colleagues organization. 4. Adhering to rules and prescribed procedures, even when it's inconvenient 5. Actively championing organizational objectives Instances of contextual performance encompass displaying extra effort, adhering to organizational rules and policies, offering help and collaboration to others, or alerting colleagues to work related issues (Motowidlo and others, 1997). O-C-B is the 'stabilizing' contextual performance, which encompasses prosocial organizational behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986). O-C-B denotes discretionary behavior that isn't necessarily acknowledged or rewarded by the formal reward system. Discretionary implies that such behaviors are not obligatory and are not part of the formal role defined in a person's contract with the organization. Barling and Cooper (2008) held that individual instances of O-C-B might not significantly impact organizational outcomes, but their cumulative effect contributes to the efficient functioning of the organization. O-C-B comprises five components: Altruism (for example, helping others) Conscientiousness (for example, adherence to organizational norms) Civic virtue (for example, staying informed about matters affecting the organization) Courtesy (for example, seeking input from others before taking action) Sportsmanship (for example, refraining from complaining about trivial issues) The more 'proactive' perspective on contextual performance includes concepts like personal initiative, taking charge, and proactive behavior (Barling & Cooper, 2008). Personal initiative is characterized by a self starting and proactive approach to work, encompassing 18.

[Audio] actions that go beyond formal requirements. Consequently, employees exhibit personal initiative when their behaviors align with the organization's mission, have long term goals, and involve finding solutions for challenging situations. Similarly, taking charge involves employees undertaking voluntary and constructive efforts that lead to organizationally beneficial changes. Proactive behavior denotes the demonstration of self initiated, forward looking actions aimed at challenging the status quo and enhancing the current situation (Parker and others, 2006). In summary, contextual performance is not a single uniform set of behaviors but rather a multidimensional concept (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). Adaptive performance (counterproductivity) The growing significance of adaptable employees in evolving and dynamic work settings has led to the recognition of adaptive performance (Pulakos and others, 2000). Various authors have referred to adaptability using different terms. Pulakos and others (2000) conducted an extensive review of the literature and factor analyses, resulting in an eight dimensional taxonomy of adaptive performance. 19.

[Audio] Figure 2: Taxonomy of Adaptive Performance Source: Tusharika Mukherjee (2023) based on Pulakos and others (2000). These dimensions of adaptive performance have been identified across a wide range of job types (Pulakos and others, 2000). Like task and contextual performance, adaptive performance also appears to be a multidimensional concept. However, further research is needed to specify factors like the determinants and outcomes of adaptive performance, as well as the applicability of the adaptive performance framework proposed by Pulakos and colleagues (2000). Chernyshenko and Stark (2005) describe the third dimension of job performance as counterproductivity, which involves deliberate behaviors that are seen by the organization as detrimental to its interests. These counterproductive behaviors can vary from overtly damaging actions like theft and property destruction to less severe behaviors such as poor attendance, information misuse, or intentionally subpar work, all of which hinder overall organizational effectiveness. 20.

[Audio] Integration of task, contextual and adaptive performance Distinguishing between task, contextual, and adaptive performance is a viable conceptual endeavor. Griffin and others (2000) proposed a comprehensive model that aimed to amalgamate these primary performance concepts. Their argument stemmed from the recognition of two fundamental shifts, namely the increasing interdependence and uncertainty within work systems (due to technological changes, mergers, globalization), which necessitate a unified model encompassing various performance dimensions. They delineated three fundamental performance dimensions: 1. Proficiency – fulfilling formalized role requirements 2. Adaptivity – the capacity to adapt to workplace changes 3. Proactivity – self directed actions necessary for adapting to changes vuca an acronym for Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity, is frequently employed in the realm of business and management to characterize the demanding and swiftly evolving operational landscape within which organizations function. These performance dimensions can be categorized into three tiers, including individual, team, and organizational levels. Griffin and others, (2007) considered individual task proficiency equivalent to task performance, with adaptivity and proactivity being particularly crucial in situations characterized by uncertainty, especially relevant in the vuca world. Furthermore, these distinct types of behavior are not mutually exclusive, but their significance should vary depending on the level of environmental uncertainty. In summary, performance should be perceived as a multi faceted construct, with these dimensions being complex in themselves. While innovation is often regarded as a way forward, in the baniworld, innovation also faces unparalleled challenges (for example, de Godoy, & Ribas Filho, 2021). The fragility of ideas and technologies necessitates continual reassessment, and increased anxiety emphasizes the crucial role of effective risk management. Nonetheless, each performance dimension correlates with various facets of organizational success, such as task performance contributing to the satisfaction of technical core requirements, making performance a complex phenomenon in modern organizational existence. 1.3 Organizational Commitment bani The bani framework, as denoted by its acronym, captures the characteristics of our present day world: Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Incomprehensible. It functions as a conceptual instrument crafted to elucidate the distinctive features of our contemporary environment, particularly in light of its complexities, uncertainties, and rapid changes. The scientific exploration of commitment was initially triggered by apprehensions regarding diminishing loyalty and rising turnover rates during the 1960's and 1970's (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). Employee commitment, often referred to as organizational commitment, was examined alongside job satisfaction as a possible factor influencing whether employees choose to remain with or depart from an organization. It is perhaps due to this association with job satisfaction that commitment emerged as a significant and notable work related attitude (Gagne, 2014). However, some theorists contend that commitment goes beyond being just an attitude and possesses robust motivational characteristics (for example, Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). Organizational commitment refers to an individual's psychological connection to an organization, encompassing their level of attachment to the organization and the extent to which they invest effort in supporting it (Judge & Kammeyer Mueller, 2012). Geisinger 21.

[Audio] (2013, p 681) defines organizational commitment as “the employees’ attachment to the organization and identification with its goals”. This commitment is rooted in the degree to which an individual identifies with their employer's values and goals. Counterproductive work behavior Like many other organizational factors, commitment strongly correlates with factors such as absenteeism, employee continuity, work motivation, counterproductive work behavior, job satisfaction, job performance, and identification with the organization (Meyer, 2016). pertains to deliberate actions or conduct carried out by employees Figure 3: Correlates of Organizational Commitment intending to cause harm to their organization, coworkers, or both. Source: Tusharika Mukherjee (2023) based on Meyer (2016). 22.

[Audio] Models of Organizational Commitment A significant evolution in commitment theory during the 1980's and 1990's was the realization that employees can form commitments toward targets or foci other than the organization (Gagne, 2014). In many instances, alternative foci, such as occupation, union, or team, often added to the existing organizational commitment and altered the reference point to align with the specific target of interest. While some studies treated commitment as a single dimensional concept (for example, Bishop & Scott, 2000), others adopted a multidimensional framework like the Three Component Model (T-C-M--) (for example, Meyer and others, 1993; Stinglhamber and others, 2002). Consequently, this shift in focus to different targets sparked significant interest in commitment research. Three component model Meyer and Allen (1991, 1997; Allen & Meyer, 1990) developed the Three Component Model (T-C-M--) of organizational commitment in response to the observed commonalities and differences in existing one dimensional conceptualizations of the concept (Gagne, 2014). All these models shared the belief that commitment forms a bond between an individual and an organization, reducing the likelihood of turnover. The key distinctions lie in the psychological state, or mindset, assumed to underlie commitment. These mindsets encompassed three distinct themes (Sutton, 2021): 1. Affective commitment: This reflects how much a person values the organization, their sense of attachment, and their feeling of inclusion. This represents the emotional attachment to the organization. 2. Normative commitment: It relates to the degree to which an employee feels obliged to stay with the organization and perceives leaving as undesirable behavior. 3. Continuance commitment: This component pertains to the extent to which an individual feels that there are associated costs with leaving the organization. Meyer and Allen acknowledge that employees could experience all three to varying degrees. For instance, one employee might possess a strong desire to stay, feel a high sense of obligation to do so, and acknowledge only modest costs associated with leaving. In contrast, another employee might exhibit little inclination to remain, experience a moderate sense of obligation, but perceive the costs of leaving as substantial (for example, reduced salary and significant disruptions associated with relocating). Gagne (2014) adds that emotional commitment is most strongly associated with positive correlations with job performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and attendance, followed by normative commitment. Continuance commitment, on the other hand, tends to have no significant or even negative relationships with these behaviors. While Meyer and Allen (1997) suggested that the true understanding of employee commitment and its effects is best achieved by considering all three components, however, how these components might interact and how individuals would experience these combinations, could have a differential impact on individual behavior. Meyer and Allen (1991) contended that individuals could experience different levels of each of these mindsets, and the outcomes of commitment would differ based on the varying degrees of strength of all three. However, it is evident from these definitions that two 23.

[Audio] of the components (normative and continuance) are related to attitudes regarding behaviors (continuing and quitting), while only the affective component reflects an attitude toward the organization. Notably, affective commitment exhibits a strongest correlation with workplace behaviors like attendance, performance levels, and organizational citizenship behavior (Meyer and others, 2002). Efforts to refine the concept of organizational commitment are ongoing, with Klein and others (2009) proposing a reconceptualization of the original model, suggesting that organizational commitment represents a 'bond' between an individual and a target, rather than a mere attitude. Klein and others (2022, p 116) further add that, “employees form commitments to multiple targets, and the coordination of those multiple commitments has become a ubiquitous part of the contemporary workplace. However, commitments are still largely studied in isolation or in one off combinations, and current commitment theory does not account for the dynamic interrelationships among multiple commitments”. The research does not align with the original three component model, and contemporary thinking advocates the use of a more generalized attitude behavior model such as the one developed by Eagly and Chaiken (1993). 24.

[Audio] Figure 4: Integrated Three component Model With Attitude behavior Model Source: Tusharika Mukerjee (2023) based on Solinger and others (2008). Attitude behavior model Eagly and Chaiken's (1993) attitude behavior model, illustrates that the three component model amalgamates attitudinal phenomena that are fundamentally distinct. Instead, the model proposes that general organizational commitment should be primarily understood as solely affective commitment, representing a true attitude directed towards the organization itself. In contrast, normative and continuance commitment seem to reflect attitudes pertaining to particular behavioral choices (in other words, staying or leaving) that may or may not stem from the emotional connection with the organization (Solinger and others, 2008). Despite the emergence of multidimensional models, understanding commitment as a unidimensional construct has also seen new developments. The most recent being the unidimensional perspective is that proposed by Klein and others (2012). 25.

[Audio] The unidimensional model by Klein, Molloy, and Brinsfield Klein and others (2012, p 137) describe commitment as “a volitional psychological bond reflecting dedication to and responsibility for a particular target”. They redefined commitment with three primary objectives: 1. Conceptualizing commitment as a distinctive form of psychological attachment or connection to emphasize its uniqueness 2. Making this conceptualization universally applicable to all commitment targets 3. Refining the construct's boundaries to eliminate potential sources of confusion found in earlier definitions According to their analysis, Klein and others (2012, p 137) concluded that commitment can be defined as 'a volitional psychological bond that reflects dedication to and responsibility for a specific target'. This definition of commitment as a specific type of bond is not merely a renaming or exclusion of certain aspects of the Traditional Commitment Model (T-C-M--). The Klein and others definition diverges from the core of commitment in the T-C-M in three salient ways. First, it characterizes commitment as a type of bond rather than a binding force (Klein and others, 2009). Second, it defines commitment as a particular type of bond, eliminating the need for auxiliary mindsets. Lastly, there is no mention of any course of action. Klein and others’s (2012) model introduces two immediate outcomes (continuation and motivation), while actions and their consequences (for example, performance) represent more distant results. Briefly, individuals who are committed are less inclined to disengage from the object of their commitment. In terms of motivation, heightened commitment leads to individuals investing more effort and resources supporting the target, and they are more willing to make sacrifices in favor of the target when allocating limited resources like time and attention (Klein and others, 2012). Additionally, the model proposes that four perceptual assessments precede commitment – salience, positive affect, trust, and perceived control – which serve as the immediate determinants of commitment. A broad array of more remote antecedents, categorized by level (for example, individual, target, interpersonal, organizational level), influence the development of commitment through the four immediate states (Klein and others, 2012). Unlike previous models, this conceptualization views commitment as a dynamic psychological state that can change over time, emphasizing the significance of voluntary dedication and acceptance of responsibility. The focus is exclusively on volitional bonds. Klein and others (2012) state that high commitment leads to positive motivational effects, driving individuals to allocate resources and make tradeoffs to support the target, such as dedicating time and energy to their jobs. However, the model does not recognize that commitment diminishes when individuals choose to relinquish responsibility for the target. There is a need for future investigations into the evolution of commitment to various targets over time (Gifford and others, 2022). 26.

[Audio] Commitment and Work Motivation Considering the similarities in the outcomes of motivation and commitment, as well as their shared sensitivity to needs satisfaction, it becomes apparent that various forms of motivation can be associated with different commitment mindsets. This linkage has been consistently demonstrated. Intrinsic and identified motivation typically exhibit a positive relationship with affective commitment, whereas introjected regulation tends to show a positive association with normative commitment (Battistelli and others, 2013). The relationship with continuance commitment appears to vary depending on the specific subscales utilized. High sacrifice relates to both introjected and external regulation, while the lack of alternatives is only related to external regulation (Battistelli and others, 2013). Introjected regulation pertains to carrying out an action because of a feeling of duty or responsibility, as opposed to an inherent inclination or for personal satisfaction. It falls within the category of extrinsic motivation. Although commitment and motivation share conceptual similarities (Meyer and others, 2004), they are distinguishable in that they are directed toward different targets: commitment is directed toward an entity (for example, the organization), while motivation is directed toward a set of actions (for example, work tasks) (Gagné and others, 2008). However, their temporal relationship has made differentiation challenging (Meyer, 2016). Some studies have assumed that work motivation acts as a mediator between need satisfaction and commitment or as a mediator between commitment and work related outcomes, such as turnover intentions. These studies have often relied on cross sectional data, leaving room for alternative directions of influence among these constructs. External regulation involves motivation that is entirely reliant on external factors and is governed by adherence, conformity, and external incentives and penalties. Meyer and others (2004) posited that affective commitment leads to the development of autonomous work motivation, normative commitment leads to the development of introjected regulation, and continuance commitment leads to the development of external regulation. However, Gagné and others (2008) argued that work motivation would instead lead to the development of organizational commitment, emphasizing that employees become attached to their organization through the process of internalization. This process involves the incorporation of external regulations, which become autonomously regulated, particularly identified regulation (Ryan, 1995). summary Organizational Behavior (O-B---) is a specialized field of study that examines how individuals, groups, and the structure of an organization influence people's behavior within a company. The primary goal of OB is to use this knowledge to enhance an organization's effectiveness. Key areas of interest within OB include motivation, leadership behavior, interpersonal communication, group dynamics, attitude development, change management, conflict resolution, and work design. Leadership is a crucial element in the realm of business dynamics and the work environment, making it an ongoing interest in researching leadership within organizational behavior. Job performance, one of the core concepts in OB, measures the collective impact of employee behaviors that bring expected value to organizations, whether positive or negative. Behaviors 27.

[Audio] related to job performance can be categorized into three main classes: task performance, contextual performance, and adaptive performance (counterproductivity). Another fundamental work attitude, organizational commitment, refers to an individual's psychological connection to an organization, including their attachment to the organization and the extent to which they invest effort in supporting it. It is rooted in the degree to which an individual identifies with their employer's values and goals. Commitment strongly correlates with factors such as absenteeism, employee turnover, work motivation, counterproductive work behavior, job satisfaction, job performance, and organizational identification. As reflected in the case study, committed employees exhibit improved performance. Enhanced job performance can, in turn, lead to heightened commitment. Organizations effectively address issues related to job performance and commitment by identifying influencing factors and implementing strategies to mitigate them. 28.